Gucci's Future Plans

GUCCI STICKS TO SHOES
PINAULT PRINTEMPS-REDOUTE is relying on leather goods and footwear as a basis for a strong Gucci future. PPR chief Serge Weinberg, who is in charge of Gucci until the new CEO, Robert Polet, takes over on July 1, said at the annual general meeting on Tuesday that the heritage leather goods make up for 70 per cent of turnover as it is. He said that Gucci saw "double-digit" sales growth in the four months up to the end of April, while YSL, which is targeting $1.21 billion turnover "as soon as possible", saw revenue growth of 15 per cent. "We have to pursue Gucci's development in products at the heart of its range, in leather goods and shoes," said Weinberg, who is under pressure to let Gucci prove itself without the help of powerful fashion due Tom Ford and Domenico de Sole. While he did not say that ready-to-wear for the label was unimportant, he did admit that it was much less dependent on it than YSL Rive Gauche. Bottega Veneta saw a 50 per cent sales rise over the period while its sister Gucci-owned labels Boucheron, Stella McCartney and Alexander McQueen grew only 5-6 per cent altogether, raising further speculation that PPR might not uphold long-term commitment to them. (May 27 2004, AM)

Wow, that Winberg is a genious That sounds like a great plan especially considering that shoes and other leather goods have been concentrated on by Gucci for how long now? Doesn't exactly sound to me like a new plan.

But grey, don't most luxury goods companies sell more accessories then clothing, not just Gucci; Dior, Vuitton, Prada......pretty much all of the major ones. I don't know that it's so much nobody is wearing the clothes, but more that people can afford to buy an expensive pair of shoes before they can afford an expensive dress.

As far as McCartney and McQueen, I would not want to be owned by Gucci Group right now. If leather goods are what Winberg is going to be so worried about, then they're both in a bit of trouble.

But grey, don't most luxury goods companies sell more accessories then clothing, not just Gucci; Dior, Vuitton, Prada......pretty much all of the major ones. I don't know that it's so much nobody is wearing the clothes, but more that people can afford to buy an expensive pair of shoes before they can afford an expensive dress.

Click to expand...

it's both ...people aren't wearing them and people can't afford them...but the people who can afford them might be buying lanvin and marni now...

and i guess that it's true enough that the luxury conglomerates subsist on their heavily logo'd status bags and leather goods...but i did not know the figures...it's much higher than i expected...
and just reinforces in me the idea that these companies are not seriously interested in fashion...and therefore are not very interesting to me...

But grey, don't most luxury goods companies sell more accessories then clothing, not just Gucci; Dior, Vuitton, Prada......pretty much all of the major ones. I don't know that it's so much nobody is wearing the clothes, but more that people can afford to buy an expensive pair of shoes before they can afford an expensive dress.

Click to expand...

it's both ...people aren't wearing them and people can't afford them...but the people who can afford them might be buying lanvin and marni now...

and i guess that it's true enough that the luxury conglomerates subsist on their heavily logo'd status bags and leather goods...but i did not know the figures...it's much higher than i expected...
and just reinforces in me the idea that these companies are not seriously interested in fashion...and therefore are not very interesting to me... [/b][/quote]
You said it!

The mode of business for these major labels, be it Gucci or Prada or Vuitton, has always been to garner media coverage and consumer hype with the RTW, while cashing in heavily with the accessories. Logoed handbags and shoes have long been the secret "darkhorse" of fashion houses; it's not a new concept and Weinberg can take home yet another trophy of redundancy.

But I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss Gucci's clothes altogether, at least in terms of profit for the company. 30% is still a substantial amount, certainly more than the percentage in companies like LV. And let's not forget they were responsible for pulling the label out of the grave in the 90's, not the tired and stale horse-bit shoes and GG-canvas bags. A large bulk of the garments sitting in their stores are also conservative, good-quality wardrobe staples like fine wool sweaters, and much like John Smedley or Malo, these things never go out of style and will always be in demand. With the recent departure of Ford, it's safe to assume the new designers wouldn't want to try anything daring for a while to ensure smooth sailing, and I can see Gucci turning into even less of a fashion-forward label while relying more heavily on these basic, no frills items.

Oh, and yet another blurb on the Gucci Group without even mentioning Sergio Rossi. Do journalists just like to ignore it for some reason?

I certainly won't mind if they say adios to Ms. McCartney. Alexander McQueen is fantastic though. Remember his tropical island/pirate Spring 2003 collection? That was one of the most amazing things I've ever seen.

Originally posted by softgrey@May 27th, 2004 - 3:30 pm I KNEW IT!!!...hardly anyone wears that stuff...only celebs and they don't pay for it...i bet btw some of the posters on here...they probably account for half of that!!! hahaha...

But I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss Gucci's clothes altogether, at least in terms of profit for the company. 30% is still a substantial amount, certainly more than the percentage in companies like LV. And let's not forget they were responsible for pulling the label out of the grave in the 90's, not the tired and stale horse-bit shoes and GG-canvas bags. ...

and I can see Gucci turning into even less of a fashion-forward label while relying more heavily on these basic, no frills items.

Click to expand...

orochian...et al...

can we stop living in the past...i will agree that the first few gucci rtw collections by tom ford were ground breaking years for the company...it was the first time the company had ever really done fashion...and they successfully brought sex back to fashion in a strong and beautiful way...

i believe tom worked closely with the great Amanda Harlech...who is now employed as a creative consultant and stylist by Chanel...and then later...with Carine Roitfeld...the current editor in chief of French Vogue...both sylists heavily influenced the gucci 'look' with their own personal styles...all those fabulous caftans came out of one of their closets...their personal wardrobes and style became 'the gucci girl'... they had as much to do with the success of those collections as tom ford did...and maybe more so...

anyway...with all the attention they garnered and all the money they spent on advertising...Gucci got a foothold in the market...and how much do you want to bet ....that the best selling items were exactly those"stale GG bags"?...

However...
since the departure of these ladies...gucci's collections have gone steadily downhill...it's all reflected in the sales...as the collections lost their magic...gucci lost sales...

cut to ...Now...
the gucci clothes from the nineties are no longer for sale...and the product they are now offering is substandard...it is not as good as the earlier stuff...and i don't think 30% is very high...I think they should be at 40%...they are not selling enough clothes!!!...that's why they are so broke...and versace too...but it's worse at versace because they don't have the leather business to fall back on...although they do have a significant home collection...it's just not enough...

but i digress...back to gucci...if they actually become even more conservative...and less fashion forward...well...that would be a disaster...imo...they've got to push things forward to keep the company alive...to keep people interested...people have very short attention spans...it looks like they may have already chosen another fashion guru...alber elbaz has been getting a lot of attention lately...lanvin could just swoop in and take all the gucci customers...just like that!...sure looks that way to me...

Retail group Pinault-Printemps-Redoute (PPR) has announced plans to refocus its wholly owned Gucci brand primarily on leather goods and shoes.

The company, which recently completed its takeover of Gucci, said the luxury goods maker derived most of its earnings from the two product categories.

“We have to pursue Gucci’s development in products at the heart of its range, in leather goods and shoes which are the heart of Gucci’s identity and which provide 70 per cent of its turnover,” PPR chairman Serge Weinberg said.

Weinberg is currently acting CEO of Gucci, with newcomer Robert Polet to take up the role on July 1.

Click to expand...

from just-style.com

not much to add to softgreys points

great news, they are finally reconstructing the label focusing away from the hype.
Now all they need is to bring back top quality and elegance to their leather goods and go from there. Brilliant marketing move. And i'm so totaly glad Botega Veneta is doing well. Their last collection was one of my faves for winter04.05

As far as I know, Gucci's quality is still quite good be it clothing, shoes, bags......I mean, no in terms of groundbreaking fashion, it's not revolutionizing design, but for wearable, luxurious clothes, they're great. I don't mean just the late 90's collections, the clothes are still beautifully made. What I'm still unclear about is why there is a more recent distaste for Ford. People have criticsized him for being too commercial or not being enough about design, but he never was. From his first ever collection he made wearable, high quality clothes. He also made it clear that he was making clothes that people would want to buy, he wasn't looking to reshape fashion as we know it. So that's why I'm confused as to why people dislike him now, but say that back when he started he did well. His recipe hasn't changed.

Originally posted by Spike413@May 28th, 2004 - 8:04 am As far as I know, Gucci's quality is still quite good be it clothing, shoes, bags......I mean, no in terms of groundbreaking fashion, it's not revolutionizing design, but for wearable, luxurious clothes, they're great. I don't mean just the late 90's collections, the clothes are still beautifully made. What I'm still unclear about is why there is a more recent distaste for Ford. People have criticsized him for being too commercial or not being enough about design, but he never was. From his first ever collection he made wearable, high quality clothes. He also made it clear that he was making clothes that people would want to buy, he wasn't looking to reshape fashion as we know it. So that's why I'm confused as to why people dislike him now, but say that back when he started he did well. His recipe hasn't changed.

Click to expand...

spike...as i said...the design team changed...and it seems clear to me where the real ideas were coming from since they stopped after they left...amanda and carine...

*and when i speak of quality...i don't mean manufacturing...i mean quality of design...which is less tangible...but more important...

it may be true that product quality has beeen declining...i just think the decline of the design was the bigger problem...put them together...and there you have even more reason why the rtw sales began to suffer...

Originally posted by softgrey@May 28th, 2004 - 8:16 am
spike...as i said...the design team changed...and it seems clear to me where the real ideas were coming from since they stopped after they left...amanda and carine...

Click to expand...

I was under the impression that they were both stylists involved in developing Gucci's image, not so much the design of the clothes.